Richard D Ackerman - #171900
Attorney Provided Information
The information below was provided by the attorney and has not been verified or monitored. The State Bar does not recommend or endorse any attorney.
Current Status: Disbarred
This member is prohibited from practicing law in California by order of the California Supreme Court.
See below for more details.
The following information is from the official records of The State Bar of California.
|Bar Number: 171900|
Law Offices of R.D. Ackerman
27638 Moonridge Dr
Menifee, CA 92585
Fax Number: Not Available
Western State Univ; Fullerton CA
Western State Univ COL; Fullerton CA
District: District 4
|Effective Date||Status Change|
|11/24/2014||Not Eligible To Practice Law in CA|
|11/23/1994||Admitted to The State Bar of California|
Actions Affecting Eligibility to Practice Law in California
State Bar Court Cases
NOTE: The State Bar Court began posting public discipline documents online in 2005. The format and pagination of documents posted on this site may vary from the originals in the case file as a result of their translation from the original format into Word and PDF. Copies of additional related documents in a case are available upon request. Only Opinions designated for publication in the State Bar Court Reporter may be cited or relied on as precedent in State Bar Court proceedings. For further information about a case that is displayed here, please refer to the State Bar Court's online docket, which can be found at: http://apps.statebarcourt.ca.gov/dockets/dockets.aspx
DISCLAIMER: Any posted Notice of Disciplinary Charges, Conviction Transmittal or other initiating document, contains only allegations of professional misconduct. The attorney is presumed to be innocent of any misconduct warranting discipline until the charges have been proven.
|Effective Date||Case Number||Description|
|10/5/2015||15-N-12501||Order re Entry of Default [PDF]|
|9/27/2013||12-O-13461||Stipulation [PDF] [HTML]|
California Bar Journal Discipline Summaries
Summaries from the California Bar Journal are based on discipline orders but are not the official records. Not all discipline actions have associated CBJ summaries. Copies of official attorney discipline records are available upon request.
August 28, 2016
RICHARD D. ACKERMAN [#171900], 47, of Menifee, was disbarred Aug. 28, 2016 and ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court.Ackerman was disbarred after his default was entered for failing to respond to a notice of disciplinary charges stemming from his failure to comply with rule 9.20. Because he did not seek to have the default set aside or vacated within 90 days, he was disbarred and the charges against him deemed admitted.He had two prior records of discipline. In 2013, he was suspended for repeatedly failing to perform legal services with competence and failing to communicate with his client in a single client matter. He was suspended again in 2015 for failing to file his first four quarterly probation reports on time or take Ethics School by the deadline.
March 8, 2015
RICHARD D. ACKERMAN [#171900], 46, of Menifee, was suspended from the practice of law for six months and until he provides proof of having successfully completed Ethics School. He was also ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court and take the MPRE. In addition, he was placed on two years’ probation and faces a one-year suspension if he does not comply with the terms of his disciplinary probation. The order took effect March 8, 2015.Ackerman’s suspension resulted from his probation being revoked for failing to file quarterly reports to probation on time in 2014 and failing to provide proof he’d attended Ethics School and passed the test.He was previously suspended in September 2013 for failing to respond promptly to reasonable status inquiries of a client, inform his client of significant developments in his case or perform legal services with competence.
September 27, 2013
RICHARD D. ACKERMAN [#171900], 44, of Riverside, was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on two years’ probation and ordered to take the MPRE. The order took effect Sept. 27, 2013.Ackerman stipulated that he failed to respond promptly to reasonable status inquiries of a client, inform his client of significant developments in his case or to perform legal services with competence.Ackerman was hired in 2007 to represent the plaintiff in a construction defect matter. After the client lost the case, he asked Ackerman to file an appeal. Despite telling the client he would file the appeal on Jan. 1, 2012, Ackerman did not file it and ignored repeated emails from the client. The deadline for filing an appeal in the civil matter ultimately passed, but Ackerman did not inform the client that he had missed the deadline.In mitigation, Ackerman had no prior record of discipline, cooperated with the State Bar, presented a number of character references and participated in a number of civic and pro bono activities.